ML20036B819

Informs That Licensee Is Expected to Continue Cooperative EP Efforts W/Appropriate Offsite Authorities

ML20036B819
Person / Time
Site:	Trojan File:Portland General Electric icon.png
Issue date:	05/20/1993
From:	Congel F Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Wingo C Federal Emergency Management Agency
References
NUDOCS 9306030154
Download: ML20036B819 (1)

Text

?

eSS 3M

~-

MAY 2 01993 Craig S. Wingo Assistant Associate Director Office of Technological Hazards Federal Emergency Management Agency 500 C Street, S.W.

Washington, D.C.

20472

Dear Mr. Wingo:

From your letter of May 11, 1993, we understand that absent removal of offsite emergency planning requirements by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC),

the States of Oregon and Washington and their respective counties engaged in emergency planning and preparedness for the Trojan nuclear power plant believe

" required preparedness efforts should be maintained." You asked that the NRC-

" assist in ensuring that all preparedness activities required under FEMA Rule 44 CFR 350.5 are planned for and conducted during calendar year 1993."

By letter of May 18, 1993, the NRC requested information from the Portland General Electric Company (PGE) which we need to evaluate the licensee's

-request to discontinue offsite emergency planning (see enclosure).

In that letter, we informed the licensee that until the NRC grants its request for an exemption and approves the Permanently Defueled Emergency Plan for Trojan Nuclear Power Plant, PGE must continue to meet regulatory requirements in 10 CFR 50.54(q) regarding emergency preparedness. Accordingly, we expect the licensee to continue cooperative emergency preparedness efforts with appropriate offsite authorities.

If you wish to discuss this matter further, please feel free to contact me at (301) 504-1088.

Sincerely, Original signed by Frank J. Congel, Director Division of Radiation Safety and Safeguards Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Enclosure:

Letter to PGE dtd. 05/18/93 DISTRIBUTION Central Files LJCunningham NRC & Local PDRs PMcKee PEPB R/F PEPB Staff FCongel EButcher 0FC SCCWPEPB:NRR C: PEF)P/NRR D:DRSS:NRR _//

RLPkeh RAEkson:jc' FJCongel h NAME I /[/93

[/24/93 DATE,5//f/93

/

OFFICIAL RECORD COPY DISK / DOCUMENT NAME: A:\\ER.'KSON\\ FEMA.PGE f) bin t

I vi 9306030154 930520 cc I

[

PDR ADOCK 05000344 gyhlnF:qu m_wrmfg :ydy g y ; g ([

' wr F

PDR-a b, g

~,..

t UNITED STATES t

')

E NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ig['E WASmNGTON, D.C. 206664XM May 18, 1993

+

Docket No. 50-344 Mr. James E. Cross Vice President, Nuclear Portland General Electric Company 121 S.W. Salmon Street Portland, Oregcn 97204

SUBJECT:

REQUEST FOR EXEMPTIONS FROM REQUIREMENTS FOR EMERGENCY PLANNING AND APPROVAL OF THE PERMANENTLY DEFUELED EMERGENCY PLAN (TAC NOS. 85980 AND 85979)

'In a letter dated March 9,1993, Portland General Electric (PGE or the licensee) requested an exemption from 10 CFR 50.47 " Emergency Plans" and 14' CFR Part 50, Appendix E, #aragraph IV, " Content of Emergency Plans". This request, if granted, would allow for the discontinuance of the need for offsite emergency planning and reduce the onsite planning to a level described in the Trojan Permanently Defueled Emergency Plan. The Permanently Defueled Emergency Plan for Trojan Nuclear Plant was forwarded to the NRC for review and approval by a separate letter from PGE, also dated March 9,1993.

The staff has determined that the most significant potential accident associated with a permanently defueled and shutdown reactor involves the spent fuel stored on site. The postulated accident sequence involves the complete or partial loss of water from a spent fuel pool containing recently offloaded fuel. This beyond design basis accident sequence could result in a zirconium fuel cladding fire that could propagate through the spent fuel storage pool and result in significant offsite consequences. Although such an accident is beyond the design bases, it may be considered within the spectrum of accidents that could require continuance of the offsite emergency plan. Description of the accident sequence and estimates of impact are contained in NUREG-1353, and behavior of the fuel during heatup is described in NUREG/CR-0649. Considera-tion of this accident scenario is limited to the period of time that the spent fuel is thermodynamica11y capable of a cladding fire. This time period of concern has been estimated to be about one to three years depending on the fuel burnup and the spent fuel storage configuration.

Before the staff can begin its detailed review of your request to discontinue the need for offsite emergency planning and the approval of your permanently defueled emergency plan the staff requires the following:

1.

An estimate of the date that the Trojan Nuclear Plant spent fuel is no longer thermodynamica11y capable of generating enough heat to result in a cladding fire in the absence of water. This estimate should consider both the perfect and imperfect ventilation scenarios

1 i

4 Hr. James E. Cross as described in Section 4 of NUREG/CR-0649. A detailed explanation of how this date was determined is to be included.

2.

Information that will demonstrate that due to site-specific considerations, and supporting analyses, the possibility of a cladding fire in the spent fuel pool is sufficiently beyond a design basis accident to not warrant requiring any continuing offsite emergency preparedness.

3.

An evaluation of those offsite preparedness measures which may not be required even if a cladding fire is postulated because of the time available after water loss in the pool and before a fire could be initiated.

Until the staff acts on both the request for an exemption to the regulations and the request for approval of the permanently defueled emergency plan, PGE must continue to meet regulatory requirements in 10 CFR 50.54 (q) regarding emergency preparedness.

Due to the complexity of this review it is possible that the staff will be unable to complete the review by the date you have re4uested. However, I can as'sure you that all available staff resources are being utilized to resolve this issue in a timely manner.

The staff under-stands that some of the contracts for offsite emergency response services will expire during the month of June 1993.

PGE should make arrangements to extend these contracts should the review of the relief requests extend past the current expiration date of the contracts.

The reporting and/or recordkeeping requirements contained in this letter affect fewer than 10 respondents, therefore, OMB clearance is not required under P.L.96-511.

Sincerely, Michael T. Masnik, Senior Project Manager Non-Power Reactors and Decommissioning

~

Project Directorate Division of Operating Reactor Support Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation cc: See next page